Filtering in oz: Australia's foray into Internet censorship

University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 493-530

  Bambauer, Derek E ^a  

^a BROOKLYN LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 76949106857     PISSN: 10867872     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (220)

1. See generally ACCESS DENIED: THE PRACTICE AND POLICY OF GLOBAL INTERNET FILTERING (Ronald Deibert et al. eds. 2008). I use the terms "filtering" and "censorship" interchangeably.
2. See generally OPENNET INITIATIVE, ABOUT FILTERING, http://opennet.net/about-filtering (last visited Dec. 5., 2009) ;
3. Jonathan Zittrain, Internet Points of Control, 44 B. C. L. REV. 653 (2003).
4. Two cautions are in order. First, Australia's filtering system has yet to be implemented and its configuration and details may change. Second, the author is an American attorney, not an Australian one, which inevitably affects the Article's analysis.
5. Andrew Hendry & Darren Pauli, "Appalled" Opposition Hits Back at Conroy's Internet Censorship, COMPUTERWORLD, Oct. 24, 2008, http://www.computerworld xom.au/index.php/id;879301684;fp;4194304;fpid;l (quoting "shadow broadband minister" Senator Nick Minchin who observed that "Labor went to the election and won on the basis of this, frankly, very heavy-handed one-size-fits-all ISP-based content filter").
6. See Frank Fisher, Caught in the Web, THE GUARDIAN, Jan. 17, 2008, available at http://www.guardian. co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jan/17/caughtintheweb (detailing the UK government's effort to suppress certain content by demanding that ISPs voluntarily opt into a system that has not been discussed or debated by the legislature).
7. See OpenNet Initiative, Europe, http://opennet.net/research/ regions/europe (last visited Dec. 3, 2009) (observing that both France and Germany have worked with search engines to remove illegal content and hate speech).
8. See, e.g., STEPHEN CONROY, LABOR'S PLAN FOR CYBER-SAFETY 5 (2007), available at http://www.alp.org.au/download/now/labors-plan-for-cyber-safety.pdf (stating "Labor's ISP policy will prevent Australian children from accessing any content that has been identified as prohibited by [the Australian Communications and Media Authority], including sites such as those containing child pornography and X-rated material").
9. See Senator Conroy Expands Reach of Net Filters to "Unwanted Content, " ITNEWS AUSTRALIA, NOV. 13, 2008, http://www.itnews.com.au/News/88908, senator-conroy-expands-reach-of-net- filters-to-unwanted-content.aspx (noting that net filters will be expanded to reach "unwanted content").
10. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, CLOSED ENVIRONMENT TESTING OF ISP-LEVEL INTERNET CONTENT FILTERING41, 62-68 (June 2008), available at http://www.acma.gov. au/webwr/-assets/ main/lib310554/isp-level-internet-content-filtering-trial-report.pdf.
11. AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY, NATIONAL PLATFORM AND CONSTITUTION 23 (2007), available at http://www.alp.org.au/platform/index.php.
12. See Darren Pauli, Anti Internet Filtering Rebels Hit the Streets, COMPUTERWORLD, Dec. 3, 2008, http://www.computerworld.com. au/article/269615/anti-content-filtering-rebels-take-streets?fp=16&fpid=l (describing protests that were arranged in Australia's capital cities by members from organizations including the Electronic Freedom Project and the Digital Liberty Coalition).
13. Computerworld, Save the Internet!, http://www.computerworld.com.au/user/ login?destination=hands-off-the-internet (last visited Dec. 2, 2009).
14. Hendry & Pauli, supra note 3.
15. See, e.g., Jennifer Dudley-Nicholson, Australia's Compulsory Internet Filtering "Costly, Ineffective, " THE COURIER-MAIL, Oct. 29, 2008, available at http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0, 25642, 24569656-5014239, 00.html.
16. See Fran Foo, ISP Filtering Gathers Pace, AUSTRALIAN IT, Feb. 12, 2009, at http://www.australianit.news.com.au/ story/0, 24897, 25043812-15306, 00.html (noting ISPs were beginning to install their testing equipment).
17. As John Perry Barlow noted, "in Cyberspace, the First Amendment is a local ordinance." John Perry Barlow, Leaving the Physical World, http://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John-Perry-Barlow/HTML/leaving-the-physical- world.html (last visited Dec. 3, 2009).
18. Derek E. Bambauer, Cybersieves, 59 DUKE L. J. 377 (2009).
19. Id.
20. Rohan Sullivan, Bush Ally Howard Defeated in Australia, WASH. POST, NOV. 25, 2007, atA17.
21. Tim Johnston, Tough Race in Australia for Supporter of Bush, N. Y. TIMES, NOV. 23, 2007, at A24.
22. See AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY, supra note 9, at 278 ("Labor is committed to improving the access of all Australians... to the benefits of broadband connectivity... [and] supports a requirement for internet service providers to offer a filtered 'clean feed' internet service to all households, schools and other public internet points accessible by children"). See also Press Release, Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister Welcomes Advances in Internet Filtering Technology (July 28, 2008), http://www.minister.dbcde.gov. au/media/media-releases/2008/060 (releasing the findings of reports that tested the current effectiveness of commercial Internet Service Providers filtering products).
23. The Last Modified date on the file containing the Cyber-Safety Plan is Nov. 19, 2007;
24. elections were held on Nov. 24, 2007.
25. CONROY, supra note 6.
26. See Stilgherrian, ACS Filter Report Just What Conroy Needs, ZDNET AUSTRALIA, Oct. 14, 2009, http://www.zdnet.com.au/ insight/security/soa/ACS-filter-report-just -what-Conroy-needs/0, 139023764, 339299029, 00.htm (describing the Plan as "thrown together in the last few weeks before the November 2007 election, well after the rest of Labor's policies had been published").
27. Press Release, Kim Beazley, Labor's Plan to Protect Kids From Internet Pornography (Mar. 21, 2006), http://web.archive.org/web/20060422120043/http:// www.alp.org.au/media/0306/msloo210.php.
28. See New NetAlert - Proecting Australian Families Online Initiative Launched, ACMASPHERE (ACMA) Sept. 2007, available at http://www.acma.gov. au/webwr/-assets/main/lib310211/acmasphere%20issue%2023. pdf.
29. See AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8.
30. CONROY, supra note 6, at 2.
31. See Tom Wood, The Wood Verdict, http://thewoodverdict. blogspot.com/(the "Porn Cracker's" blog).
32. See also Nick Higginbottom & Ben Packham, Student Cracks Government's $84m Porn Filter, HERALD SUN, Aug. 26, 2007 (on file with U. PA. J. INT'L L.) (reporting that the "Porn Cracker" was able to hack the software in thirty minutes).
33. CONROY, supra note 6, at 4.
34. See also Meredith Booth, Adelaide Firm to Benefit as Businesses Tighten the Net, THE ADVERTISER, NOV. 11, 2008, at 37 (noting that NetFox, a tool that filters in real time, was forecasting small business demand for its product this year will boom).
35. Currency figures are in Australian dollars unless noted otherwise.
36. Australian Government, NetAlert, http://www.netalert.gov. au/(last visited Dec. 3, 2009).
37. Andrew Colley, Costs and Lack of Enthusiasm Threaten Free Net Nasty Blocking Plan, AUSTRALIAN, Feb. 26, 2008, at 29.
38. Health Gilmore, Web Porn Software Filter Takes Biggest Hit, SUN HERALD (Sydney), Feb. 17, 2008, at 40.
39. Glenn Mulcaster, Opposition Rises to Internet Filter, THE AGE (Melbourne), Nov. 11, 2008, at 5.
40. Samela Harris, Op-Ed., The Hand That's On Your Mouse... and Why It Will Make Your Internet a Whole Lot Slower, ADVERTISER, Oct. 28, 2008, at 19.
41. Graham Clark, Seven Days, COURIER-MAIL, NOV. 15, 2008, at 54.
42. Mulcaster, supra note 32.
43. Electronic Frontiers Australia, Labor's Mandatory ISP Internet Blocking Plan, http://www.efa.org.au/censorship/mandatory-isp-blocking/(last visited Dec. 3, 2009).
44. See, e.g., Editorial, Flawed Plan for Internet Control, CANBERRA TIMES, Jan. 3, 2008, at 14 (criticizing government efforts to filter Internet content) ;
45. Editorial, Net-Nanny State Worth Watching, AUSTRALIAN, Jan. 3, 2008, at 9 (discussing worrying aspects of the government's plan to filter Internet content) ;
46. Computerworld, supra note 11 (voicing concerns over the government's proposed Internet filtering plan).
47. See, e.g., Paul Syvret, Net Censorship Under Attack, COURIER-MAIL, Jan. 19, 2008, at 56 (quoting the concerns of a librarian at the University of Technology in Sydney).
48. See Asher Moses, Children's Welfare Groups Slam Net Filters, THE AGE (Melbourne), Dec. 1, 2008, http://www.theage.com.au/ articles/2008/11/28/1227491813497.html?page=fullpage (quoting a member of Save the Children as saying that educating kids and parents was the way to empower young people to be safe internet users).
49. Australia to Implement Mandatory Internet Censorship, HERALD SUN, Oct. 29, 2008, http://www.heraldsun. com.au/news/mandatory-censorship-on-web/story-0-1111117883306.
50. See Nate Anderson, Australia's Internet Filter: Could Legal Content Be Banned, Too?, ARSTECHNICA, Oct. 28, 2008, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081028-australias-internet-filter-could- legal-content-be-banned-too.html (last visited Nov. 12, 2009) (discussing Family First's role in influencing governmental Internet filtering) ;
51. FAMILY FIRST, INTERNET PORNOGRAPHY AND CHILDREN 1 (2008), http://www.familyfirst.org.au/documents/ INTERNETPORNOGRAPHYANDC HILDREN.pdf (advocating a "Mandatory Filtering Scheme at the ISP Server level").
52. Fran Foo & Andrew Colley, ISPs' Co-Operation Crucial to Federal Blocks on Child Pornography, THE AUSTRALIAN, July 29, 2008, at 27 (quoting Child Wise chief executive Bernadette McMenamin).
53. Id. See also Fran Foo, Net Porn Filter Plan Needs Facelift, AUSTRALIAN IT, Jan. 8, 2008, http://www.australianit.news.com.au/ story/0, 24897, 23021650-16123, 00.html (last visited Nov. 12, 2009) (noting opposition by Telstra BigPond, Australia's largest ISP).
54. Asher Moses, Labor Plan to Censor Internet in Shreds, THE AGE, Dec. 9, 2008, available at http://www.theage.com.au/ articles/2008/12/09/1228584820006.html.
55. See, e.g., Ben Grubb, ACS Gives Conditional Thumbs Up to Internet Filtering, IT NEWS AUSTRALIA., Oct. 12, 2009, http://www.itnews.com.au/News/158006, acs -gives-conditional-thumbs-up-to- internet-filtering.aspx (last visited Dec. 5, 2009) (reporting ACS support for filtering if five listed conditions are met by the federal government, including a specifically defined purpose of filtering).
56. Andrew Colley, Filtering standards to be eased for mobiles, THE AUSTRALIAN, Sept. 30, 2008, at 30.
57. Asher Moses, Web censorship plan heads towards a dead end, BRISBANE TIMES, Feb. 26, 2009, http://www.brisbanetimes.com. au/news/technology/web
58. Id.
59. See generally Frank Fisher, Caught in the web, THE GUARDIAN, Jan. 17, 2008, available at http://www.guardian. co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jan/17/caughtintheweb (discussing internet censorship by the Australian government).
60. Conroy clarifies Net filter plans, WORLD NEWS AUSTL., Mar. 31, 2009, http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1013745/ Conroy-clarifies-Net-filter-plans (last visited Nov. 12, 2009).
61. Andrew Colley, Net Filtering May Not Be Mandatory, AUSTRALIAN IT, May 26, 2009, http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0, 27574, 25542310-15306, 00.html (last visited Nov. 12, 2009).
62. See ACMA, Internet Codes Index, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=IND-REG-CODES-INT (last visited Nov. 12, 2009) (provides access to a current list of "codes of practice" ISPs operate under based on legislation).
63. See COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT; Frederick Schauer, On the Migration of Constitutional Ideas, 37 CONN. L. REV. 907, 918 (2005) (noting that the Australian constitution does not contain a Bill of Rights).
64. See generally EVAN CROEN, OPENNET INITIATIVE, AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND (May 15, 2007), http://opennet.net/research/regions/au-nz ("Without any explicit protection of free speech in the constitution, the Australian government has used its 'communications power' delineated in the constitution to regulate the availability of offensive content, endowing a government entity with the power to issue takedown notices for Internet content hosted within the country.").
65. See, e.g., Levy v. Victoria (1997) 189 C. L. R 579 (holding that the implied constitutional freedom of political speech is not absolute since laws that may restrict political communication are valid if they are meant to achieve a legitimate purpose).
66. See Paula Baron, The Moebius Strip: Private Right and Public Use in Copyright Law, 70 ALB. L. REV. 1227, 1252 (2007) (discussing how "the lack of a free speech guarantee" can affect public access to information, such as the Internet).
67. Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Act 1999, No. 90 (amending Broadcasting Services Act, No. 110 (1992) (Austl.)) (Austl.). See generally Christopher Stevenson, Note, Breaching the Great Firewall: China's Internet Censorship and the Quest for Freedom of Expression in a Connected World, 30 B. C. Int'l & COMP. L. REV. 531, 535 (2007) (discussing Australia's Internet censorship method of relying on reports by the public to identify prohibited online content and classify it).
68. See Broadcasting Services Act, No. 110, §§ 147, 149 (1992) (Austl.) ;
69. ACMA, Prohibited Online Content, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STANDARD/pc =PC-90102 (last visited Nov. 8, 2009) (providing a checklist for filing a complaint, such as being an Australian resident, knowing the Internet address, and having reasons to believe the online content is prohibited).
70. See generally ACMA, Online Regulation, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC-90169 (last visited Nov. 8, 2009)
71. See NATIONAL CLASSIFICATION CODE, FED. REG. OF LEGIS. INSTRUMENTS F2005L00816 (Austl.), available at http://www.comlaw.gov. au/ComLaw/Legislation/Legislati velnstrumentl.nsf/0/B0644DBE6C7780F8C A256FD6001312 BE/$file/ National+Classification+Code+for+tabling+and+registratio.pdf (describing films, documentaries, and publications that are classified under each category).
72. ACMA, supra note 57.
73. See Classification Board, The Classification Website, http://www.classification. gov. au/www/cob/classification. nsf/Page/ Classification-in-Austr aliaWho-we-areClassification-Board (last visited Nov. 8, 2009) ; The Classification Website, Classification Review-Board, http://www.classification. gov. au/www/cob/classification. nsf/Page/ Classification-in-AustraliaWho-we-areReview. Board (last visited Nov. 8, 2009).
74. See supra note 59 and accompanying text.
75. Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games, FED. REG. OF LEGIS. INSTRUMENTS F2008C00126 (Austl.), available at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/ Legislation/LegislativeIristrumentCompilationl.nsf/0/F0EC030Al 08C93DDCA2574120004F6B8/$file/FCGGuidelines2005.pdf (explaining the criteria for classifying publications and films under the 1995 amendment in user-friendly language).
76. Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act, 1995, No. 7 (1995) (Austl.) (setting out the requirements for the application and review of classifying media content).
77. The Classification Review Board, http://www.classification. gov. au/www/cob/classification. nsf/Page/ClassificationinAustralia-Whoweare- ReviewBoard -ReviewBoard (last visited Oct. 26, 2009)
78. ACMA, What Will ACMA Do?, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC- 310147#whatwill (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (describing the steps ACMA will take if content is prohibited or not hosted in Australia).
79. See Classification (Publications, Films, and Computer Games) Act 1995 § 5 (defining "film" to include "any other form of recording from which a visual image, including a computer generated image, can be produced").
80. See Australian Government, Attorney-General's Department, Classification Categories and Markings, http://www.ag.gov. au/www/agd/agd.nsf/ Page/Classificationpolicy-Classificationcategoriesandmarkings (last visited Oct. 26, 2009) (comparing classification schemes for films, Internet material and publications).
81. Electronic Frontiers Australia, FOI Request on ABA, http://www.efa.org. au/FOI/foi-aba-2000.htm (last visited Oct. 26, 2009) (discussing the Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision to black out URLs on documents before releasing them to Electronic Frontiers Australia).
82. ACMA, Regulating Online Content, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=INT-IND-CONTENT-ABOUT (last visited Dec. 4, 2009).
83. Id. (stating that ACMA will notify suppliers of approved filters if the content is not hosted in Australia, but is likely prohibited).
84. Fran Foo, Row Over Web blacklist, AUSTRALIAN IT, Feb. 24, 2009, http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0, 24897, 25096792-15318, 00.html (quoting ACMA figure of 1090 sites as of January 31, 2009).
85. Id. (quoting November 30, 2008 figures which involved 1370 pages, including 864 RC content links, 674 child pornography links, and 441 χ18+ links). The total exceeds 100% as a site may be both child pornography and RC.
86. Id.
87. John Ozimek, Aussie Internet-Net Will Be Drawn Wider, THE REGISTER, Feb. 25, 2009, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/oz- internet-net/.
88. Nate Anderson, Australia's Internet Filter: Could Legal Content Be Banned, Too?, ARS TECHNICA, Oct. 28, 2008, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081028-australias-internet-filter-could- legal-content-be-banned-too.html.
89. See, e.g., Asher Moses, Christians Upset at Conroy's Net Policy "Backtrack, " SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, May 27, 2009, available at http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/web/ christians-upset-at-conroys-net-policy-backtrack/2009/05/27/1243103585180.html (discussing the debate around whether the government should soften its policy to censor Internet content).
90. andt (outlining the different types of legislation enacted by States and Territories that enable prosecution of Internet users that make available or download child pornography).
91. Internet Watch Foundation, http://www.iwf.org.uk (last visited Dec. 11, 2008)
92. Moses, supra note 44.
93. The ACM A has begun researching this issue. Testimony of Nerida O'Loughlin before the Standing Committee on Environment, Communication, and the Arts 65-66 (2009), available at http://www.aph.gov. au/hansard/senate/committee/S11635.pdf.
94. See generally AMCA, supra note 57 (requiring that a complainant be an Australian or a company based in Australia).
95. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coal, 535 U. S. 234 (2002) (ruling that virtual child pornography is protected under the First Amendment).
96. But see United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008) (upholding a conviction for the violation of a statute prohibiting the act of knowingly receiving obscene material).
97. McEwen v. Simmons & Anor (2008) N. S. W. S. Ct. R. 1292;
98. see generally Bellinda Kontominas, Simpsons Cartoon Rip-off is Child Corn -Judge, SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, Dec. 8. 2008, available at http://www.stuff.co.nz/4786351al860.html (explaining the ruling of an Australian Supreme Court judge who ruled that an Internet cartoon in which characters from The Simpsons engage in sexual acts is child pornography).
99. See Jake Adelstein, This Mob Is Big in Japan, WASH. POST, May 11, 2008, at B2 (noting Japan does not criminalize possession of child pornography, though it does ban distribution and production).
100. IWF Backs Down on Wiki Censorship, BBC News, Dec. 9, 2008, available at http://news.bbc.co. Uk/2/hi/technology/7774102.stm. The offending image is available from Wikipedia, Virgin Killer, at http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin-Killer.
101. See, e.g., Foo, supra note 14 (reporting the timeline for ISP filtering trials).
102. See AUSTRALIAN COMPUTER SOCIETY, TECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS ON ISP BASED FILTERING OF THE INTERNET 3, 12-15 (Oct. 2009), https://www.acs.org.au/attachments/2009/ispfilteringoct09.pdf (describing the complexity inherent in the development of Australia's Internet filtering system).
103. See Croen, supra note 533 (providing an overview of both the Australian and New Zealand approach to filtering Internet content).
104. See Content Filtering in Saudi Arabia, http://www.internet.gov. sa/learn -the-web/guides/content-filtering-in-saudi-arabia (last visited Dec. 6, 2009).
105. See ETHAN GUTMANN, LOSING THE NEW CHINA: A STORY OF AMERICAN COMMERCE, DESIRE, AND BETRAYAL 127-32 (2004) (explaining Chinese motivation for and approach to control over Internet architecture) ;
106. JONATHAN L. ZITTRAIN & JOHN G. PALFREY, JR., INTERNET FILTERING IN CHINA IN 2004-2005: A COUNTRY STUDY 48-49 (Apr. 2005), http://opennet.net/sites/opennet.net/files/ONI-China -Country-Study.pdf (reporting research results that reflect China's multi-tiered approach to control of information online).
107. See Roger Clarke's Website, Origins and Nature of the Internet in Australia: The Beginnings of the Australian Internet, http://www.rogerclarke. com/II/ozl04.htmlo#beg (last visited Oct. 27, 2009) (mapping the rise of the Australian Internet connectivity from a university-centered system to a national network).
108. See AUSTRALIAN COMPUTER SOCIETY, supra note 88, at 12 (outlining the numerous considerations presented by the decision of where to filter within an ISP network).
109. See, e.g., Nick Bryant, Australia Trials National Net Filters, BBC NEWS, Oct. 25, 2008, http://news.bbc.co. Uk/2/hi/technology/7689964.stm (presenting Australian politician Stephen Conroy's explanation of the filtering project in contrast with the popular reaction that it has provoked).
110. See AUSTRALIAN COMPUTER SOCIETY, supra note 88, at 3 ("[RJecent Government statements indicate that ISP level filtering will apply to RC material that is on the ACMA blacklist, [but] there is still a considerable amount of confusion amongst the ICT sector on exactly what content will be filtered.").
111. See generally Nart Villeneuve, Choosing Circumvention: Technical Ways To Get Round Censorship, in REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS, HANDBOOK FOR BLOGGERS AND CYBER-DISSIDENTS 63 (2005), http://www.rsf.org/IMG/pdf/ handbook -bloggers-cyberdissidents-GB.pdf (providing insight into the various forms of "circumvention technologies" that allow people to avoid online censorship and surveillance efforts).
112. See, e.g., Contempt by Paul Dwerryhouse, How to Bypass Australia's Forthcoming Internet Filter, http://weblog.leapster.org/archives/122-How-to -bypass-Australias-forthcoming-internet-filter.html (Nov. 13, 2008, 18:17) (describing use of SSH as a SOCKS proxy to a remote server).
113. See Tor: Overview, http://www.torproject.org/overview.hrml.en (last modified March 3, 2009) (explaining how the system enhances privacy by keeping users anonymous through distribution of transaction points, and also giving examples of how people use the system to access Internet services and communicate with others).
114. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 9 (assessing the relative levels of probability that various forms of Internet filtration will be circumvented).
115. See, e.g., Sumner Lemon, Group Offers Tools to Evade China's Web Censorship, PC WORLD, Aug. 4, 2008, http://www.pcworld.com/ businesscenter/article/149341/group-offers-tools-to-evade-chinas-web-censorship. html (reporting on the availability of software that allows reporters in China to circumvent online government filters).
116. See, e.g., THE CITIZEN LAB, University of Toronto, EVERYONE'S GUIDE TO BY-PASSING INTERNET CENSORSHIP 16 (Sept. 2007), http://citizenlab.org/CL- circGuide -online.pdf (offering one example of an activist "tunneling" past Chinese Internet firewalls in order to post otherwise censored information) ; Nart Villeneuve, Evasion Tactics, 36 INDEX ON CENSORSHIP 71, 75 (Nov. 2007), available at http://www.nartv.org/mirror/evasiontactics-indexoncensorship. pdf (referencing a widespread Iranian practice of dodging Internet filters in order to follow the writings of bloggers).
117. See generally Liam Tung, BitTorrent hole in ISP filter tests, ZDNET AUSTL., July 18, 2008, http://www.zdnet.com. au/news/conununications/soa/BitTorrent -hole-in-ISP-filter-tests/0, 130061791, 339290888, 00.htm (reporting on the federal government's release of the results of ISP-level content filtering tests).
118. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 17-18, 22.
119. Id.
120. Id. at 20-22.
121. Id. at 35, 37.
122. Zero under-breadth would mean that the difference between the total sites tested in Categories 1 and 2 and the total sites blocked divided by the total sites tested in Categories 1 and 2 equals zero.
123. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 35, 37.
124. Id. at 62-68.
125. See discussion of these results infra Section 5.2.
126. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 34.
127. Id. at 62-68.
128. Id.
129. Id. at 60 (describing the filtering product Alpha).
130. Conroy Announces Mandatory Internet Filters to Protect Children, AUSTL. BROAD. CORP. NEWS, Dec. 31, 2007, http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/31/2129471.htm [hereinafter Mandatory Internet Filters]
131. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, app. f at 62-68.
132. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER CONTENT FILTERING PILOT: TECHNICAL TESTING FRAMEWORK 1 (2008), available at http://www.dbcde.gov. au/-data/assets/pdf-file/0006/89160/ technical-testing-framework.pdf
133. See, e.g., Fran Foo, Telstra says no to filtering trials, AUSTL. IT, Dec. 9, 2008, http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0, 24897, 24771009-15306, 00.html (reporting that Telstra and Internode, two of Australia's largest ISPs, both declined to participate in content filtering trials).
134. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., supra note 117, at 2;
135. Moses, supra note 44;
136. see also Foo, supra note 14 (noting TECH 2U will let participating customers designate additional content categories for blocking).
137. Foo, supra note 14.
138. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., supra note 117, at 8.
139. See, e.g., Darren Pauli, Optus, iiNet Put Filters to the Test, COMPUTERWORLD, Nov. 13, 2008, http://www.computerworld.com. au/article/267223/optus-iinet -put-filters-test (reporting that trials restricted to 12 Mbps will undermine final test results since they are only a "small fraction of ISP network connections").
140. The government received applications from sixteen ISPs and initially selected six. Foo, supra note 14. Some ISPs, such as iiNet, sought to participate to demonstrate "how stupid it is." Asher Moses, Net censorship plan backlash, THE AGE (Melbourne), Nov. 11, 2008, http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/biztech/net-censorship-plan- backlash/2008/11/11/1226318639085.html?page =fullpage#contentswap1 (quoting iinet managing director michael malone who was participating in the trials to give hard data that the system would not work).
141. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., supra note 117, at 4;
142. Moses, supra note 44. But see IWF backs down on Wiki censorship, supra note 86 (reporting Internet Watch Foundation's withdrawal of its objection to a Wikipedia page containing suspected child pornography).
143. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., supra note 117, at 3.
144. Id.
145. Id.at 5.
146. Cf. INTERNET FILTERING IN SAUDI ARABIA IN 2004, http://opennet.net/studies/ saudi#toc1d (last visited Dec. 3, 2009) (describing inadvertent blocking in Saudi Arabia due to classification errors).
147. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 44-45.
148. See generally AUSTL. COMPUTER SOC'Y, supra note 88, at 5 (exploring the best approaches to ISP filtering while recognizing there are many ways to circumvent these efforts).
149. See generally Stumbling onto Smut: The Alarming Ease of Access to Pornography on Peer-to-Peer Networks: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on Gov't Reform, 108th Cong. 27-48 (2003) (statement of Linda D. Koontz, Director, Information Management Issues, U. S. General Accounting Office) (providing data that child pornography is easily found and downloaded from peer-to-peer networks) ; Press Release, Dep't of Justice, Multi-Agency Investigation Targets Use of Peer-to-Peer Networks to Exchange Child Pornography (Aug. 19, 2008), available at http://losangeles.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel08/ la081908usa.htm (discussing a multiple-agency effort to target those using peer-to-peer networks to exchange child pornography).
150. See Moses, supra note 39 (quoting David Vale, Executive Director of UNSW's Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre as saying, "[t]here seemed to be some consensus that the proposed mandatory filter model would not actually be directed at the real channel of child porn distribution, which is not the blacklist of known web sites, but via various other internet protocols and tools").
151. AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY, supra note 9, at 23-24.
152. ORG. FOR ECON. CO-OPERATION AND DEV., OECD BROADBAND SUBSCRIBER CRITERIA (2008), http://www.oecd.org/document/46/0, 3343, en-2649-34225-39575598-1-1-1-1, 00.html.
153. Five of six products tested in the initial trial caused at least 20% decreases; two caused at least 75% drops.
154. See generally Fisher, supra note 4.
155. See CYBERTIP!CA, CLEANFEED CANADA, http://cybertip. ca/app/en/cleanfeed (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (stating Canada's Cleanfeed system "aims to reduce accidental access to child sexual abuse images as well as to discourage those trying to access or distribute child pornography").
156. See France Blocks Online Child Porn, Terrorism, Racism, U. S. A. TODAY, June 10, 2008, available at http://www.usatoday.com/tech/ world/2008-06-10-france -online-porn-N.htm;
157. Declan McCullagh, Google Excluding Controversial Sites, CNET NEWS. COM, Oct. 23, 2002, http://www.news.com/2100-1023- 963132.html (stating that Google has deleted controversial sites in France) ;
158. SANGAMITRA RAMACHANDER, OPENNET INITIATIVE, EUROPE, http://opennet.net/research/regions/europe (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (discussing suits brought against Google and Yahoo by French entities).
159. See Posting of C. J. Hinke to Global Voices Advocacy, Censoring Free Speech in Thailand (May 17, 2008), http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/ 2008/05/17/censoring-free-speech-in-thailand.
160. See OPENNET INITIATIVE, INDIA (2007), http://opennet.net/research/profiles/india (stating that the Department of Telecommunications announced that mechanisms would be installed to filter websites in India).
161. See Jeffrey Rosen, Google's Gatekeepers, N. Y. TIMES MAG., Nov. 30, 2008, at 50 (stating that "a Turkish judge had ordered the nation's telecom providers to block access to the [YouTube] site in response to videos that insulted the founder of modern Turkey") ;
162. Yigal Schleifer, Turkey Tightens Controls on Internet Speech, CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, Oct. 30, 2008, available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1030/p06s01-wome.html (discussing Turkey's ban on 850 websites).
163. See generally ACCESS DENIED, supra note 1.
164. Bambauer, supra note 16, at 390-410.
165. AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY, supra note9.
166. See, e.g., Mandatory Internet Filters, supra note 115.
167. Official Committee Hansard: Testimony Before the Sen. Standing Comm. on Env't., Commc'ns., and the Arts 71-79 (2009) (Austl.) (statement of Sen. Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy), http://www.aph.gov. au/hansard/senate/commttee/S11635.pdf [hereinafter Conroy Statement]
168. CONROY, supra note 6.
169. CONROY, supra note 6, at 2-7.
170. Compare CLASSIFICATION BOARD, COMPLIANCE FOR CINEMAS AND OTHER PUBLIC EXHIBITORS, http://www.classification. gov. au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/Industry-HowtoComplywithClassificationLaws- ComplianceforCinem asandOtherPublicExhibitors (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (providing a guideline of compliance requirements), with ACMA, Minimum Verification System Requirements: Restricted Access Systems Declaration 1999 (source on file with U. PA. J. INT'L. L) (setting out the minimum system requirements for a "restricted access system"), and Gerard Goggin, Regulating Mobile Content: Convergences and Citizenship, 12 INT'L J. COMM. L. & POL'Y 140, 149-52 (2008) (discussing mobile device content regulation).
171. See Conroy Statement, supra note 146 (indicating much recent debate in Australia on the issue).
172. See, e.g., REPORTERS WITHOUT BOREDERS: TUNISIA, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id-article=26158&Valider= OK (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (providing an example of how Reporters Without Borders challenges governmental claims).
173. See generally ACCESS DENIED, supra note 1 (explaining how the OpenNet Initiative challenges governmental claims).
174. Vietnam, for example, claims to censor only pornography. However, the country blocks zero pornographic sites, but does block a host of political ones.
175. See OPENNET INITIATIVE: VIETNAM, May 9, 2007, http://opennet.net/research/profiles/vietnam.
176. See, e.g., Bryant, supra note 94 (indicating that child pornography will be blocked in Australia).
177. Senator Conroy Expands Reach of Net Filters to "Unwanted Content", IT NEWS AUSTRALIA, NOV. 13, 2008, http://www.itnews.com.au/News/88908, senator -conroy-expands-reach-of-net- filters-to-unwanted-content.aspx.
178. DEP'T OF BROADBAND, COMMC'NS AND THE DIGITAL ECON., supra note 117, at 3.
179. Asher Moses, Net Filters May Block Porn and Gambling Sites, WATODAY, Oct. 27, 2008, available at http://www.watoday.com.au/ technology/biz-tech/net -filters-may-block-porn-and-gambling-sites-20090616- ce9y.html (quoting John Lindsay).
180. Electronic Frontiers Australia, FOI Request on ABA, supra note 69.
181. See generally ACMA, ACMA LIST OF PROHIBITED AND POTENTIALLY PROHIBITED OVERSEAS HOSTED CONTENT, Mar. 19, 2009, http://www.acma.gov. au/WEB/STAND ARD/pc=PC-311669.
182. See Conroy Statement, supra note 146 (indicating governmental categories and priorities in banning material).
183. See generally supra notes 56-68 and accompanying text (providing background on the classification scheme).
184. See Testimony Before the Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications., and the Arts, supra note 145. The Family First Party, for example, advances Internet filtering as a child-protection measure.
185. See FAMILY FIRST, PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM PORNOGRAPHY (2008), http://www.familyfirst.org.au/policy/policypornography.pdf (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (providing a discussion of this position). However, it justifies tightening standards for content allowed on television because shows such as Big Brother "legitimiz[e] behavior that is completely unacceptable", contravening "decent standards." FAMILY FIRST, ENSURING DECENT STANDARDS ON TELEVISION (2008) (last visited Dec. 4, 2009), http://www.familyfirst. org.au/policy/policytelevisionstandards.pdf.
186. Dan Harrison, Review of Website Blacklist in Wind, SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, May 27, 2009, available at http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/web/review-of-website-blacklist-in-ind/ 2009/05/26/1243103573711.html.
187. See generally AUSTRALIAN COMPUTER SOC'Y, supra note 88, at 5 (calling on the Australian government to "establish greater transparency and accountability in the criteria and processes for incorporating sites onto the black list").
188. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 62-68.
189. Id.
190. OPENNET INITIATIVE, IRAN (June 16, 2009) http://opennet.net/research/profiles/iran (last visited Dec. 4, 2009).
191. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 20-22, 35-37.
192. See MCAFEE: TRUSTEDSOURCE WEB DATABASE REFERENCE GUIDE 59 (2009), available at http://www.securecomputing.com/techpubs-download.cfm?id=2066 (describing pornography category and giving sample URLs).
193. See generally Foo, supra note 43 (discussing ISP and Webshield's activities).
194. See SECURE COMPUTING, SECURE WEB FILTER: PRODUCT OVERVIEW 1 (2008), available at http://www.securecomputing.com/pdf/WEB W-URLfltr-PO.pdf ("Add your own entries to any one of Secure Web Filter's categories or create and populate your own user-defined categories.").
195. See generally Foo, supra note 14.
196. See generally Villeneuve, supra note 96 (discussing the problems these websites create).
197. See CITIZEN LAB, supra note 101 (describing how this occurs).
198. See Contempt, supra note 97 (stating explicitly the weaknesses in the proposed filtering system).
199. See Hendry & Pauli, supra note 3 (giving an example of how a private network was used for a circumvention technique).
200. DEPARTMENT OF BROADBAND, supra note 117, at 6.
201. See OPENNET INITIATIVE, SINGAPORE 3 (2007) http://opennet.net/research/profiles/singapore (2007) (documenting that Singapore's ISPs block only seven pornographic sites).
202. See, e.g., OPENNET INITIATIVE, SUDAN 4 (2007) http://opennet.net/studies/sudan2007 (2007) (describing that a search portal and a site on domestic violence had been previously misclassified as pornography and blocked).
203. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY, supra note 8, at 62-68.
204. Id.
205. Robin Miller, Meet Saudi Arabia's Most Famous Computer Expert, NEWSFORGE, Jan. 14, 2004, http://www.linux.com/archive/ articles/33695.
206. See generally ABDULAZIZ HAMAD AL-ZOMAN, THE INTERNET IN SAUDI ARABIA (TECHNICAL VIEW) (2001), http://www.isu.net.sa/library/CETEM2001-Zoman.pdf (presenting data on the internet in Saudi Arabia).
207. See generally Country Profile: Australia, BBC NEWS, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/country-profiles/1250188.stm#facts (providing general information about Australia and its leaders).
208. Big Core, CANBERRA TIMES, May 19, 2008, at A13; Press Release, Senator Stephen Conroy, Consultative Working Group to improve Cyber-Safety (May 15, 2008), http://www.minister.dbcde.gov. au/media/media- releases/2008/035.
209. See generally Hendry & Pauli, supra note 3.
210. See, e.g., Posting of Mark Newton to http://forums.whirlpool.net. au/forum-replies.cfm?t=967413&r=16774529#rl6774529 (Sept. 30, 2008, 4:58 PM) (posting in opposition to the filtering plan).
211. See, e.g., John Timmer, Aussie govt: Don't Criticize Our (Terrible) 'Net filters, ARS TECHNICA, Oct. 24, 2008 (on file with U. Pa. J. Int'l L.) (criticizing the Australian government's filtering policy).
212. Asher Moses, Filtering Out the Fury: How Government Tried to Gag Web Censor Critics, THE AGE (Melbourne), Oct. 24, 2008, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/10/23/1224351430987.html?page=2.
213. Conroy Announces Mandatory Internet Filters to Protect Children, supra note 115 (quoting Conroy: "If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd-Labor Government is going to disagree").
214. See supra notes 79-86 and accompanying text.
215. See supra note 82 and accompanying text.
216. See Websense Web Filter, http://www.websense.com/content/ WebFilter.aspx (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (providing information for the Websense filtering product).
217. See McAfee SmartFilter, http://www.securecomputing.com/index.cfm ?skey=85 (last visited Dec. 4, 2009) (describing the benefits and features of McAfee SmartFilter).
218. Cf. DEPARTMENT OF BROADBAND, supra note 117, at 2-3.
219. See, e.g., Secure Computing, http://www.securecomputing.com/index. cfm?skey=86#categories (describing the drugs category of sites blocked by smartfilter).
220. Cf. Hendry, supra note 3 (pointing out that a content filtering scheme installed in Parliament offices mistakenly blocked legitimate topics like gun control and breastfeeding).